Sunday, December 19, 2010

Yesterday, Congress finally voted to begin the process of ending the ban on people who are openly gay, lesbian, or bisexual serving in the military. Since such people have served over the years, usually while hiding their sexuality, this will hopefully be a reasonable change. But, now comes the cries from the transgender extremists to also be allowed to serve. Hopefully, they will never succeed.

Imagine the disaster that allowing openly transgender people to serve in the military. Imagine the nightmare of having men demanding to wear female uniforms, and to be allowed to reside in women's quarters. Or vice versa. Not to mention that more than a few people who identify as transgender often suffer from mental health issues ranging from relatively mild to extremely severe,

I figured this was coming. Even though in the past, even the most extreme would admit that doing away with DADT would do nothing for transgender people who wanted to serve, I suspected that once things change for gays and lesbians, the kooks would start demanding more.

I see nothing wrong with transsexuals who have completed transition, including full genital surgery, possibly being allowed to serve if otherwise qualified, but allowing transgender people to serve openly is outrageous, and would bring serious disruption to the military.

Two of the most extremist of the transgender activists, "Monica" Helms, and "Autumn" Sandeen, are now demanding that men be allowed to serve while pretending to be women. This is an absurd effort, but as has long been obvious, there is no restraint on their silliness.

Monday, December 6, 2010

Well, it seems that "Autumn" Sandeen has decided to abuse the changes to the rules concerning passports, while playing dumb (or is he really that stupid) about why his new passport will be limited to two years.

Simply put, the government has had a long standing policy that allows those who are traveling overseas for SRS to obtain a temporary two year passport for the purpose of obtaining that surgery. Apparently, the rules have been loosened a bit to remove the specific requirement that one be traveling for surgery, but still there remains a two year limit for those who have not yet had SRS, clearly to allow them to easily travel for that purpose.

Well, of course the radical transgender crowd, like Sandeen, think this gives them license to obtain an ID that is often allowed in place of a birth certificate. So, now Mr. Sandeen can pretend to be a natal woman, while remaining an intact man.

In response to a question, he claims to not know why his deceptive passport will be limited to two years. The answer is simple...it is to allow him to travel to a place like Thailand to have SRS. But, of course, that is not what Mr. Sandeen plans to do. He just wants to have something that falsely claims he is a woman...another chance to revel in his transgender status, imagining himself to be a real woman....with a penis.

Mr. Sandeen needs to realize that a passport that claims he is a female will not make him a woman. It will just make him a man who is lying. And when his two years are up, his passport will end, and he will very possibly find that is it. That he will have had his little fun, but there will be no more.

I fully support the idea of allowing a temporary change to allow for travel for surgery, but all Mr. Sandeen's abuse of this will do is give conservatives more ammunition to oppose even that small favor.

Then again, Mr. Sandeen refuses to see that his antics hurt the chances for repeal of "don't ask. don't tell." Some of the extremists are even starting to push for the repeal of the ban on transgender people being allowed to openly serve. That is an absurd suggestion. While I can where people who have completed transition, and have had full surgery, might be able to serve, the idea of someone like Sandeen demanding to be allowed to serve as a female, while retaining his penis, is absurd. There really are limits, though extremists like Sandeen and his ilk refuse to acknowledge them.

UPDATE

It appears that Mr. Sandeen has decided that he misread the new law. He now plans to fraudulently claim that he has completed his transition, and that he is fully female. Apparently the kooks at NCTE talked to Obama administration into wording things vaguely enough that people can claim that they are fully transitioned when they are not. Never mind that such a change will almost certainly result in a nasty backlash that will wind up hurting true transsexuals when a more conservative president is elected. They will have had their short season of fun pretending to be women, and real women will, again, suffer.

Saturday, December 4, 2010

Sometimes the radical extremists go just a bit too far. A perfect example of this is Bil Browning's latest absurd rant on Bilerico. He has his nose out of joint because a couple of pedophiles, who dressed up as women and tried to seduce a teenage boy, were referred by their actual names and called "perverts." Well, duh!

One of the men was charged with rape, and the other was charged with unlawful sexual conduct with a minor.

Bil states that it is not clear whether they were "transgender women." It really doesn't matter. They are both pedophiles, and are both criminals. They will, hopefully, go to prison, and will, again hopefully, serve long, and probably very unpleasant, sentences. When they get out, they will have to register as sexual predators.

Yes, these men are perverts. I cannot think of a better term for someone engaging in such behavior. What they did is inexcusable. Even if they are, by some incredible stretch of the imagination, actually transsexuals, what they did is outrageous. They are not deserving of anything other than a long stretch in prison. Being held up to public ridicule is the least of their problems,

The real irony in all of this is the picture that accompanies the article. It is a rabbit covering his ears, and it says "make the stupid people shut up."

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

In what seems like a blast from the past, there is a new controversy over an attack on "transwomen" by a "radical feminist/lesbian separatist." The controversy started with an article at a site called the "Magazine Project. That article, entitled "Transwomen" are Merely Castrated Men was attacked by ultra bigot Monica Roberts. Roberts' rant became fodder for an article by transgender activist Suzan Cooke.

Now, on the one hand, the original article is pretty nasty, and the author, as is typical of extremists, paints with a very broad brush. But that does not mean that she is completely wrong. The sad thing is, there is a lot of truth in the article.

For one thing, some transgender people cannot understand why many, if not most, women are put off by them. They simply cannot grasp that they really are acting like men, and have no real female essence. But they want to call themselves "lesbians," and they cannot understand why real lesbians are not lining up to enjoy their, well, as Roberts would put, neoclits. Well, duh....

Of course, these same kooks can't quite seem to grasp that some men are going to lose it when they find that their new girlfriend is physically a male. Now, I don't excuse the violence that results, but I also think people need to use some simple common sense. I mean, really, women learn to avoid certain situations, but men think they have some sort of privilege.

The problem with the original article is that the author ignores science and relies on feminist myth. Yes, there are a lot of "transwomen" of the sort she describes. But they are not representative of transsexuals. Of course, the author, as a I said, paints with a broad brush. I suspect, like some men, she fears having sex with someone who was once physically a male. But, this person, like Roberts, and Cooke, is an extremist. For her, the world is simple, and well, she is completely right, and everyone she disagrees with is completely wrong.

Likewise, Cooke and Roberts are so insecure that the very idea that there is someone out there who just might seem them differently than the way they see themselves sends them into fits of outrage. Does it bother me if someone attacks my identity? Of course. But I also consider the source. I could care less what some radical feminist/lesbian feminist, who has never met me, thinks about me. Trust me, there are far more reasons for her to dislike me than my history. There is little in her narrow minded philosophy that I would not find reprehensible. There is little of my world view that would not send her into fits of outrage. So why should I care if she is even more bigoted?

I tend to ignore people like her. She is not even worth addressing, except that she does make some good points, that are lost on the other kooks. They only focus on the hatred, to avoid the truth. It's sad. They all have something to learn, but none what to see it.

About Me

Copyright Notice

All original content of this blog is copyright 2017 by J.U. and all rights are reserved.

Comment Policy

Just so there is no confusion, and to make sure that certain gender fascists cannot make false claims, I want to make clear my policy concerning comments. The only rule, and it is a hard and fast one, is "NO INVASIONS OF PRIVACY!" That is, if you post information about me, such as my name, or other private information, your post will not see the light of day. After having a couple of rather nasty trolls try to get around this, I have had to do something I really dislike. Because Blogger does not allow me to block individuals, I now have to approve all comments. But, if your comment does not violate the one rule, it will be approved. So please, don't go running to someone and claim you were censored...especially someone with an established history of censoring posts to prevent actually having to defend his silliness...